george matthews wrote:
Sir Ray wrote:
I interpreted "conservative" as meaning they used more than necessary. But presumably they used not enough.
johnthefireman wrote:Experts at war over rail structure and supervision as SGR project limps on
"“These problems keep arising because the contractors are being conservative on the amount of steel reinforcement being used on the structures"
Also known as "cutting corners"...
The article is pretty clear that the Chinese contractors are skimping on construction materials and cutting corners:
“The design standard being used by the Chinese is not what Kenyan engineers have used before and this was the main bone of contention in this project. For instance, Kenyans use steel in making culverts while the Chinese prefer concrete with minimal to no steel reinforcement,” he said.
I find this quote interesting:
They have attributed these apparent weaknesses to the contractor’s decision to use the Chinese Standard instead of the British Standard that they are familiar with.
In context, this implies the Chinese standard is, well, what we in the US view, say, cheap power tools from Chinese -as unmitigated designed to fail junk.
Obviously Chinese engineers, designers, and workers can produce high quality, well-engineered durable products, but the corporations ordering the products often won't pay for that - does the same apply to those paying the bill on this East African railroad project?